Liberté de religion et liberté d’expression au Canada. Une articulation renouvelée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les tribunaux canadiens ont rendu, durant les dernières décennies, des décisions sur plusieurs types d’expressions religieuses, mais se sont peu référés à la liberté d’expression. Cet article résume l’état de la jurisprudence à ce sujet et se penche sur le cas des témoins de Jéhovah qui ont bataillé pour leur liberté d’expression et contribué à l’avènement des chartes canadiennes des droits. On analyse enfin l’émergence d’une nouvelle confluence entre liberté religieuse et liberté d’expression dans les débats juridiques entourant la loi 21 québécoise sur la laïcité. On conclut en nous penchant sur les controverses récentes autour d’une disposition du Code criminel selon laquelle la condamnation de l’incitation à la haine à l’encontre d’un groupe peut être atténuée si elle revêt un sens religieux.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".